[Devel] Re: [RFC v2][PATCH 01/10] Infrastructure for work postponed to the end of checkpoint/restart

[Oren Laadan]

Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Oren Laadan (orenl at cs.columbia.edu):
>> --- a/checkpoint/Makefile
>> +++ b/checkpoint/Makefile
>> @@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
>>  # Makefile for linux checkpoint/restart.
>>  #
>>
>> -obj-$(CONFIG_CHECKPOINT) += sys.o objhash.o \
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_CHECKPOINT) += sys.o objhash.o deferqueue.o \
>>  		checkpoint.o restart.o \
>>  		ckpt_task.o rstr_task.o \
>>  		ckpt_mem.o rstr_mem.o \
>> -		ckpt_file.o rstr_file.o
>> +		ckpt_file.o rstr_file.o \
> 
> ?
> 
>> +int cr_deferqueue_add(struct cr_ctx *ctx, cr_deferqueue_func_t function,
>> +		     unsigned int flags, void *data, int size)
>> +{
>> +	struct cr_deferqueue *wq;
>> +
>> +	wq = kmalloc(sizeof(wq) + size, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!wq)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	wq->function = function;
>> +	wq->flags = flags;
>> +	memcpy(wq->data, data, size);
>> +
>> +	cr_debug("adding work %p function %p\n", wq, wq->function);
>> +	list_add_tail(&ctx->deferqueue, &wq->list);
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
> 
> Shouldn't the deferqueue be protected by a spinlock here?

Not until we implement concurrent checkpoint/restart. At the moment
it's one task at a time the can access it.

Oren.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers